162 
of the fine, long, juicy, red meat, ice rind watermelons, 
and the delicious finely flavored juicy musk melon, of 
the nutmeg and pine apple kind, from seed from Old 
Virginia, I know you would give evidence strongly for 
the south, and declare, as well you might, you never saw 
the like at the north. 
Erroneous opinions prevail at the north in relation to 
the health of the south, to as great or probably greater 
extent than on any other subject. On the Mississippi and 
othev river swamps, the people are not healthy, though 
those who reside there are not willing to acknowledge 
it, but the truth is they are subject to ague, and billions, 
and sometimes congestive fever; and during three or 
four months of the summer and fall, I would be unwil¬ 
ling to risk my health in such situations; but even there, 
as the country is cleared up and drained, they will be 
more healthy. Those residing on the Mississippi river 
for 100 or 200 miles above New Orleans, are said to be 
healthy'; I do not know the fact of my' own knowledge, 
but I do know that those living off the river bottoms enjoy 
generally good health. 
I know of no better way of giving a correct idea of 
this part of the country, than to give an account of my 
own place and family, which I believe is a fair specimen 
of the general health of the country. My plantation is 
situated on a tolerably large creek, (Perry’s,) running 
from N. to S. through it, for upwards of a mile and a 
half; the houses situated in a grove of 12 to 15 acres, 
about half a mile from the creek, west. West and south 
west of the creek, high hills or mountains running for 
about two miles; the land is cleared from the creek to 
those hills, which is about three-fourths of a mile. From 
the hills to the creek, with the exception of the grove 
about the houses, the land is in cultivation, (about 600 
acres or over.) In the year 1835, this place was settled 
by my brother and myself, with our negroes and a mana¬ 
ger; but I did not move from Virginia with my family, 
until the fall of '38, when 1 took charge of the planta¬ 
tion myself. My white family number from six to eight, 
and one or two years, including my overseer’s family, as 
high as 15 or 16. My negroes between 70 and 80. Up 
to this time, there has been no death in my white family, 
and but three cases of serious sickness; only three deaths 
from disease amongst my negroes, from the year 1835, 
one adult and two children, (one of the children was dis¬ 
eased before it moved here;) and two young babies have 
died from the carelessness of their mothers smothering 
them during the night. During the months of July and 
August, there are occasionally billions attacks among the 
negroes, though they generally yield to medicine in a 
few days. I consider this climate decidedly more healthy 
for negroes than Virginia, and more healthy for whites i 
from 1st October to June, as we have no winter fevers; 
but from the middle of June to October, more subject to 
bilious fever than Virginia, above tide water; but du¬ 
ring those months nothing like as sickly as Virginia, be¬ 
low tide water. Those who are mueli exposed to the sun 
and dews here, are more apt to be attacked than those 
who are not. The ladies, I consider healthy all the year 
round. The people are generally rosy and robust, and 
beyond all doubt the most prolific country I have ev'er 
seen. If those who travel to the south, would quit the 
rivers and stage roads and come amongst us, and visit us 
at our homes on our plantations, and see our hills as well 
as our valleys, and become acquainted with us, our fruits 
and productions of all kinds, —lay aside all prejudice, we 
nor our fruits would be slandered. But a prejudiced, 
one-sided fellow from Europe or the North, takes stages 
and steamboats—rattles and steams through the country 
—judges of the people from the loafers at the little towns 
—the country from the river swamps, and returns per¬ 
fectly satisfied that he entertained correct opinions of us 
and our country when he started—publishes his ‘‘ Notes,” 
&c. and proves to all w'ho know no better, that “corn 
will grow thirty feet high and bear no ears,”—“vines 
run 100 feet and boar no melons,’’ and what they may 
bear “ dry and tasteless,’—peach trees bear only once 
in three years, and then the fruit is “ knotty' and dry,” 
and many other things equally as absurd and false. 
I fear, Messrs. Editors, I have run out the/raifs of my 
labor much longer than y'ou are willing to read, much 
more to print. Yet I cannot conclude without say'ing' 
something of our crops. In this county, the cotton crop 
now is very fine, but in danger from running too much to 
weed; a wet September, the crop will be ruined—dry 
from this to I-1 of October, the crop w'ill be fine. Corn 
crops tolerably good, new crop offering for 25 cents per 
bushel. The cotton cro;) in the lower part of this state, 
and in part of Louisiana, said not to be good, though I 
do not know' it of my own knovvleilge. 
J. T. Leigh. 
Yelabusha co.. Miss., Avg. 12, 1843. 
DEBT THE FARMER’S MASTER. 
IvIessrs. G.vyloed & Tucicer —I have been favorably 
situated the last 15 years, to see and know much of the 
ways and doings of the farmers and planters around me, 
and am well convinced they are a class that flatter them- 
selv'cs much, dull students in the study and practice of 
economy, fast and liberal buyers on credit, but slow pay'- 
ers. There are honorable exceptions to this rule, whose 
cash or punctuality', makes the trader his obsequious and 
humble servant.) The farmer sows his seed, plans, 
pitches his crop, makes his calculation in his favorite 
rule, multiplication, (not having cyphered as far as sub¬ 
traction-) being all fixed off; he goes to the merchant, 
calls for and buys upon the hopes of his ungerminated 
seed, to bo paid f ir at harvesting; the price he frequent¬ 
THE CULTIVATOR. 
ly objects to, but it rarely prevents his purchasing. The 
trader thinking in the meanwhile, of insects, flies, worms, 
two ahd four footed varmints, mildew, rust and bad wea¬ 
ther; his figures too work in subtraction, adds another 
enemy in the shape of a long profit, to the number. 
If we examine the business of unlimited credit and 
large percentage, how often or invariably do we find the 
ruinous Effects to both, but more extensively to the 
farmer; and then for “ foreclosing.” What a sad tale to 
be told of a class that should be the most happy, most in¬ 
dependent of all others; and yet how is it with us now? 
no better than in years gone by'; 1 in 50 may' pay as they 
pui-chase; 1 in 100 hardly punctual to the day, or 1 in 
500 holding nothing but their own, and paying down as 
they receive. Farmers generally toil and labor more in¬ 
cessantly than other people, if not as hard as negroes and 
coRiers, yet more diligently, with often no success at all. 
You may rely' on it, farmers, and see to it, that this 
buying on time is not to your interest, should you not 
have to pay interest. Did you ever see how the cash ex¬ 
hibited by 3 buyer, controls the seller, and how Cheap he 
works, comes down in his price, and so very polite with¬ 
al. Then be convinced it is for the good of both to ex¬ 
change cash for goods, and save the expense of paying 
the merchant for a day book and ledger, and being your 
book keeper; he will not foot up your account for noth¬ 
ing, but ask and demand his price. D. G. Weems. 
Tracey's Landing, Md., 1843. 
BEES AND BEE-HIVES. 
Editors of the Cultivator —The communication 
on the subject of bee-hives in your August number, signed 
“ N. of Worthington,” is, I think, calculated to convey 
to your readers a wrong impression, where he says “ it 
can be used gratis,” (meaning, if I understand him,) 
without infringing on any patent right. If he is a reader 
of the Cultivator, he may not have forgotten a hive called 
the Perfect Hive, figured and described in y'our May 
number, having precisely such a bottom hoard as his, 
and on which a patent has been obtained.* He also says 
he has had in use the Vermont hive. Now he knows, 
or should know, that Mr. Weeks obtained a patent on a 
suspended bottom board of whatever form constructed, 
(and on his “ gratis” hive the bottom is suspended.) 
Perhaps some of the many patentees might wish to say a 
word about this “ gratis” hive; and now one word as to 
my own experience. The first improved hive I used 
was the Charlieshope, and at that time it was quite an im¬ 
provement on the old box. There were, however, ob¬ 
jections, such as the expense of making and suspending 
it; but the greatest was, connecting the bottom board to 
the body by a common door butt, thus forming across the 
backside, a joint where worms would always find a hi¬ 
ding place. 
When the Vermont hive was introducedbj'Mr. Weeks, 
with the suspended bottom, I purchased the right to use, 
and was much pleased with it on trial, so far as the 
worms were concerned; but still the expense off con¬ 
structing and suspending remained the same as in the 
Charlieshope. 
I have also used Webb’s patent, but have never found 
anj' to equal the Perfect Hive mentioned above and de¬ 
scribed in the Cultivator as above. The form is simple, 
the cost trifling, which is quite an item; and being in 
form similar to the old box hive, will stand where you 
choose to place it, (saving the expense of stands on which 
to hang it;) and as the body is raised half an inch above 
the bottom by means of the hinges attached to it, the 
bees protect themselves from the worms without difficulty. 
Supposing your readers, like myself, are pleased with 
facts stated, instead of theory', I will venture to give you 
a short history of one of my swarms of bees this season. 
To all appearance they wintered as well as the others; 
but when the working season came they remained idle; 
no bees or very few were seen, and those few that did 
venture out, returned in most cases without anything. 
The hive in which they were, was so constructed with 
glass, that I could expose to view almost the entire front 
and side. The bees remained in this inactive state until 
the middle of July. So few were going and returning, 
no one without watching the hive,Would have suspected 
there was a swarm in it. The comb was so constructed 
in the hive, that on opening the front, the cells were 
exposed to view from top to bottom, which was near 20 
inches. Early in the spring, the cells in this sheet of 
comb were empty, and thus they remained until within 
a short time, without having deposited in them a single 
egg or particle of honey. No bees were seen on the 
front comb, but on opening the side of the hive, a very 
fair number could be seen in the back part, where they 
remained stationary. I concluded that as they wou d 
network in the season of honey, neither would they eat 
after that season was passed. However, the difficulty in 
the case was what I was searching for; and after repeat¬ 
ed examinations I could discover no drones in the hive, 
and concluded I would introduce some—though I was 
told the bees would destroy them as fast as I put them in. 
I took from another hive, say 25, put them in through a 
ventilator near the top. I could not on that or any sub¬ 
sequent day, discover any dead drones under or around 
the hive, and I presume they did not kill them. And now 
the result, y'OU will say. Not ten days were gone before 
there was a marked change in the hive for the better; the 
bees were beginning to be more active, and it has gone 
*It is due to “N. of Worthington,” to say that his commu¬ 
nication was received in February last. Of course it was writ¬ 
ten long before he could have seen the description of the “ Per¬ 
fect Bee-Hive,” published in May.— Eds. 
on increasing from day to day until now, five-weeks from 
that time, the swarm appears perhaps as well as any I 
have. The empty comb is fast filling with honty, and I 
have now no fears but it will be full for winter and prove 
a good strong healthy swarm. Yours, 
Nashua, N. H., 8 mo. 21, 1843. N. or Nashua. 
APPLICATION OF MANURE. 
The writer of the following paper informs us in a 
note, that it was written for the Cultivator immediately 
after the appearance of Mr. Garnett’s paper on manures, 
to which it refers, (for this paper, see vol. VI, page 104,) 
but was mislaid and forgotten, until he saw the request 
of Mr. Armstrong in relation to this subject, in a late no. 
of the Cultivator. After some just remarks on the ne¬ 
cessity of greater precision and accuracy in statements 
intended for the public, and acknowledging the pleasure 
and instruction he had derived from the writings of Mr. 
Garnett, he proceeds to the article of Mr. G. to which 
allusion has been made. 
“ The object of the communication is to prove that the 
surface application of manures is the best. To prove this 
the writer states the following experiment: 
“ I began penning my cattle late in the spring, and 
continued it until frost, in pens of the same size, moved 
at regular intervals of time, and containing the same 
number of cattle during the whole period. These pens 
were alternately plowed and left unplowed, until (he fol¬ 
lowing spring, when all were planted in corn, immedi¬ 
ately followed by wheat. The superiority of both crops 
on all the pens which had remained unplowed for so 
many months, after the cattle had manured them, was 
just as distinctlj' marked as if the dividing fences had re¬ 
mained standing.” From this, Mr. G. infers that it is 
“ best to apply manure on the surface of the land.’’ If the 
experiment proves any thing to my mind, it proves quite 
the reverse of the above inference. 
In the early part of his communication, Mr. G. says: 
“ Some thirty-five or forty years ago, I had adopted, but 
without examination, the notion then most common a- 
mongst us, that it was best to let all putrescent manures 
be well rotted first, and next to bury them deep, either 
by the plow, spade or hoe.” This notion, however, 
with him, and some of his neighbors, has happily be¬ 
come exploded. Permit me to ask, if suffering manure 
to lie exposed to the alternate sunshine and rain of a long 
summer, and through the following winter, is not a 
pretty effectual method of bringing it into a state that 
may with propriety be termed “ well rotted;” and in this 
condition, Mr. G. caused it to “ be buried by the plow.” 
But it may be replied that the fertilizing qualities of the 
manure thus exposed, had been absorbed by the surface 
of the earth. This, however, with the manure “ well 
rotted,” by Mr. G.’s process, was placed at the bottom, 
that is, “ buried;” so that take it in what light you please, 
it appears to me that the experiment as clearly proves 
that “ burying by the plow,” “ well rotted manure,” is the 
best mode of producing a crop, as it does that the surface 
application is “ the best.” 
Again,—let us look at the other part of Mr. G.’s expe¬ 
riment, which he thinks proves that “ burying manure,” 
is not useful. This too, I contend, proves, if any thing, 
the reverse of what he claims. The pens which were 
first plowed, were, I presume, plowed again when he 
put his seed in, though he does not say so; and theren is 
inaccurate in his detail. I take it for granted, however, 
that he did plow the second time; if so, did he not bury 
his manure in a fresh state, and suffer it to remain there 
until it had become “well rotted,” and then by the se¬ 
cond plowing to receive the seed, turn it, together with 
that part of the earth most liable to become fertilized by 
the decomposition 6f the manure, up to the surface, to 
receive the seed? If he did not plow the second time, 
that may sufficiently account for his not getting as good 
a crop as he did upon those parts plowed when the seed 
was put in. 
Understanding however, that all the fields W'ere plow¬ 
ed together at the time of planting, is it not apparent 
from (he experiment, that in those “pens” in which Mr. 
G. supposed he applied the manure to the sui-face, he ac¬ 
tually “buried” if—and in those where he supposed he 
“ buried” it, was in fact, at the time of planting on the 
surface? 
In what I have said, I do not mean to intimate an opin¬ 
ion for or against the surface application of manure. I 
am not a farmer of sufficient experience and reading, to 
give an opinion upon such a subject. I merely wished 
to show the grounds upon which 1 complained that the 
experiment was to my mind unsatisfactory. 
Before closing my letter, already too long, permit me 
to allude to one of Mr. G.’s proofs that the “gas,” or 
that portion of manure taken from it by the process of 
evaporation, is not lost, but is “ immediately given by 
the atmosphere to the tops of plants, as more suitable to 
them than to the roots.” 
He says that on taking the bark off from_ the bodies of 
certain young trees, in a ring about three inches wide, to 
his surprise, during the first year or two, the part of the 
body above the ring, became obviously larger than the 
part below, and that this difference increased every year 
afterwards. , . • 
I make no great pretensions to a knowledge of physi¬ 
ology, either animal or vegetable, but I had always un- 
derstood that the sapj or that fluid of a plant from which, 
it derives its chief nutriment, circulated in a manner cor¬ 
responding in some measure to the circulation of the 
blood in the animal system. That it passed up from the 
root, being derived from the earth, through that entire 
